Turlock machine

[Cblackburn]

Can anyone tell me about Turlock machine

[azmodela]

Originally Posted by 1930 coupe

WHY would someone do that to a block?
Oil groves are wrong also.

The oil grooves aren't necessary. How can they be wrong?

[Marco Tahtaras]

Originally Posted by azmodela

The oil grooves aren't necessary. How can they be wrong?

That's a first for me. Please bring me up to speed on this concept.

[MikeK]

I remember a certain "Miracle engine" guy, (Flanagan?) that used to butcher, er, I mean 'improve' blocks like this. You get the best of all worlds:

1) The cam/crank gear spacing gets pinched too tight.
2) The pistons, already higher after decking, will now be alarmingly high.
3) Your transmission will now work automatically. With the lost alignment of the crank center to the tranny, the thing will pop out of gear all by itself!

About the oil grooves- those appear to be Rich's A.E.R. inserts, not poured babbitt.

[d.j. moordigian]

Okay........I thought about this since it was first posted, the first thing out
of my mouth is not printable. I have modified everything on engines, and I
mean everything! On any engine, were that crank lays is ground zero,...you
can change everything else you can think of, except the "crankshaft center line",
period.
The only thing I could think of, and I can't see the front and center main good
enough,...if he milled a "register" for some kind of different rear main cap. So
I looked at the photo again,...the bearing shell for the rear main "looks" positive
too the milled surface.

Oil grooves,......not so good for "gravity feed",...okay for pressure...

[turlockmachine]

Sponsored Links (Register now to hide all advertisements)

This is Joe from turlock machine. The picture you see here is of an engine that I machined. This is shown with AER insert bearings installed, not Babbitt. The crank centerline is in original ford specs using kr Wilson alignment tools. The rear main has been machined to allow the rear main cap to fit flat the block not to change the "up and down position of the crank. Making the cap fit flat to the block fixes the rear main oil leak issue. The only thing changing is the position of the cap on the block which gets line bored anyhow and allows for part of the bearing that sits in the block to be aligned to the rear main cap . I have built more than 600 engines since 1999 without one single insert bearing failure or timing gear clearance issue . I'm pretty confident in my engines as I am pretty sure that no one else offers a 2 year warranty on a model a engine.

[d.j. moordigian]

What are you doing about the rear main pan gasket...thicker gasket?

* Also, how deep is the register? Kinda looks about 25.*

[turlockmachine]

The pan gasket is cork on the cap and is designed for shim adjustment so it is a non issue. The register generally is between .002" and .005" but has never been more than .010"

[hardtimes]

Originally Posted by turlockmachine

This is Joe from turlock machine. The picture you see here is of an engine that I machined. This is shown with AER insert bearings installed, not Babbitt. The crank centerline is in original ford specs using kr Wilson alignment tools. The rear main has been machined to allow the rear main cap to fit flat the block not to change the "up and down position of the crank. Making the cap fit flat to the block fixes the rear main oil leak issue. The only thing changing is the position of the cap on the block which gets line bored anyhow and allows for part of the bearing that sits in the block to be aligned to the rear main cap . I have built more than 600 engines since 1999 without one single insert bearing failure or timing gear clearance issue . I'm pretty confident in my engines as I am pretty sure that no one else offers a 2 year warranty on a model a engine.

Hey Joe,
Thanks for splaining youse self ! I hope that all is going well with you and your A/B engine building business. Hope to do (B) business with you in future. Please PM me , if you can use good A blocks...no cracks

[Ron/IA]

My engine is an example that oil grooves are necessary (at least in a Model A engine). My engine was rebuilt without oil grooves on the rods or crankshaft, and long story short; they went bad in hurry.

Also, I have seen original from the factory engines with oil grooves; those that I have seen were always in an "X" pattern.

My experience would never convince me that oil grooves are not necessary. Others experience of course may be different.

[turlockmachine]

Oil grooves are absolutely necessary for gravity Fed oiling. The inserts shown in my engine at the top of this page have 2 oil grooves in them: the radial groove that you can see in the pic and an axial groove that runs along the part line of the insert. It stops before the rear of the bearing as to not let too much oil out the rear and onto the garage floor.

[Russ/40]

Turlockmachine, you have more than vindicated yourself! Beautiful work, and sound engineering.

[d.j. moordigian]

I understand what your doing and why......good thought!

Do you "pour"?

Dudley

[MikeK]

Having the parting plane of the cap/block no longer at the centerline of the crank makes for an interesting 'fit' of the inserts shown. The shells are designed to achieve proper 'crush' with their parting at the crank centerline. Each shell half has a tab that butts against a flat surface of the other block or cap half. Those tabs prevent rotation, or spun bearings. The block tab is visible in the photo posted. Since the intended shell parting plane is no longer aligned with the block/cap plane, some interference or geometric mismatch will occur as those two tabs are forced to mate with unequal sectors of the bore. I see this as a very bad way to address rear oil seepage.

[P.S.]

I will have one of Joe's touring motors in my Tudor pretty soon. If you have interest in how Joe's motor performs, there will be ample opportunity to see it for yourself at the NCRG roundup in May or the MAFCA event in July. I'm not stuck up- you can check it out if you want. Listen to it, ride in it, whatever.

[Mitch//pa]

Originally Posted by P.S.

I will have one of Joe's touring motors in my Tudor pretty soon. If you have interest in how Joe's motor performs, there will be ample opportunity to see it for yourself at the NCRG roundup in May or the MAFCA event in July. I'm not stuck up- you can check it out if you want. Listen to it, ride in it, whatever.

can we drop the pan and look

[johnneilson]

MikeK,

Your analysis is correct, in theory.
In practice it holds no water. I have done a few girdle assemblies over the last few years. Since I need the bottom surface to be as uniform as possible, I Blanchard grind the bottom of the block to ensure the surface is true and flat. The shells are actually made to crush on the parting line surfaces. The tabs typically are displaced metal that is actually below the surface and not impacted by the parting line.

The practice of pouring is much different than inserted motors, as well the full pressure setups.

FWIW, I just fired up a race motor yesterday.
With 95 psi on the gauge it leaked nothing. And this from a motor that last year marked it spot in the shop, trailer, tarps etc.

I see nothing wrong with Turlocks approach, very good!!

[MikeK]

Originally Posted by johnneilson

MikeK,

Your analysis is correct, in theory.
In practice it holds no water. I have done a few girdle assemblies over the last few years. Since I need the bottom surface to be as uniform as possible, I Blanchard grind the bottom of the block to ensure the surface is true and flat. . .

john, Yes, I agree with your blanchard cleanup for the girdle, but you then reset the crank centerline to the new parting plane, as you bore for bearings referenced to that plane, correct? You do not have greater than a half circle machined into the girdle and less than a half circle in the block, like the rear cap mating surface shown above, or do you?

[d.j. moordigian]

Originally Posted by MikeK

Having the parting plane of the cap/block no longer at the centerline of the crank makes for an interesting 'fit' of the inserts shown. The shells are designed to achieve proper 'crush' with their parting at the crank centerline. Each shell half has a tab that butts against a flat surface of the other block or cap half. Those tabs prevent rotation, or spun bearings. The block tab is visible in the photo posted. Since the intended shell parting plane is no longer aligned with the block/cap plane, some interference or geometric mismatch will occur as those two tabs are forced to mate with unequal sectors of the bore. I see this as a very bad way to address rear oil seepage.

That's why I asked about the register,....but .002" to .005" I have
no problem, .010" is a push. I'd bet those bearings have a "high
to medium eccentricity", which gives it some wiggle room. The amount
of clearance behind the "tang" should allow for the shell not to
distort.

[johnneilson]

Originally Posted by MikeK

john, Yes, I agree with your blanchard cleanup for the girdle, but you then reset the crank centerline to the new parting plane, as you bore for bearings referenced to that plane, correct? You do not have greater than a half circle machined into the girdle and less than a half circle in the block, like the rear cap mating surface shown above, or do you?

NO, I do not reset the CL.
I place the crank in the proper location, the furthest I have had to move one was .014, this to retain proper cam gear relation and offset to bores.
You have to be careful when assembling because the insert is proud from the block and recessed into the girdle.

I have seen where someone tried to use bearing too small on the OD and moved the crank deeper into block and away from cam to keep gear mesh. IMHO, this works, but I don't subscribe to this practice.

If you do the math, moving the CL .015 makes the parting line distance less than .0003 less than Ø. The inserts have a pretty good chamfer/lead-
in so it does not create issue.

BTW, removing the tangs completely is no issue if the bore is done correctly. The crush to hold inserts in place is the circumference not diameter (~.0031 per .001Ø)

J

[hardtimes]

Hey Ron,
Which 'engine builder' built your A engine without oil grooves on bearings ?

[Ron/IA]

Hardtimes - I wish I knew; it was done before I bought the car, and the previous owner had passed away.

My Dad and I bought the car at auction from the previous owners estate, and the family could not provide us any information about work that had been done.

[Vic in E-TN]

About 12 years ago I had a bad experience with an engine builder (Sturim) that did not put the grooves in the babbitt. It took an hour or so to fail after it was in the car. They said that they built race engines and never put the grooves in. The response was that they would redo the babbitt. My response was that they would never see the engine again.

Vic

[Mike V. Florida]

WOW disagreements and no tempers or name calling. Way to go!! I found this was a lucid, well thought-out, intelligent discussion.

[turlockmachine]

Originally Posted by forever4

Maybe, but it does not change the facts. Buyer beware.

You are absolutely correct, it does not change the facts. The main fact being that ALL of the crankshaft bearing caps were designed to be adjustable with shims and NONE of them were made to have the parting line on the centerline of the crank. Yes, buyer beware, I stand behind my engines with a 2 yr warranty. Go find that somewhere else.

[Franchise_24]

Sponsored Links (Register now to hide all advertisements)

Originally Posted by forever4

Maybe, but it does not change the facts. Buyer beware.

Why do you have such a bad attitude about this man?

*Edit: I see he now has deleted his message...

[P.S.]

Originally Posted by Franchise_24

Why do you have such a bad attitude about this man?

I'm pondering the same thing.

-------------

Mitch: That all depends. But I think you would be better off just going to Joe's shop and seeing one in the assembly stage for yourself.

[Mitch//pa]

Originally Posted by P.S.

Mitch: That all depends. But I think you would be better off just going to Joe's shop and seeing one in the assembly stage for yourself.

Lol

[hardtimes]

Originally Posted by P.S.

I'm pondering the same thing.

-------------

Mitch: That all depends. But I think you would be better off just going to Joe's shop and seeing one in the assembly stage for yourself.

I'm with Franchise and P.S. in pondering why there are those that seem to want to crucify this engine builder,despite what's been stated here and other threads relative to this members business ..what is going on here
Mitch of Pa, have you purchased one of his engines or been to his shop and had bad experience ? He has told us that he has built A/B engines for fifty years and has tried to explain to those who do not know engine building...what his methods involve. He is a machinist with a machine shop dedicated to building A/B engines. He has built hundreds of such engines and that is exactly what WE need in this 'hobby' ! If you do not have direct knowledge and/or evidence to support disparaging him and his business, why are you doing it ? We need to drive another engine builder off of this forum and hurt his business...without ever having gone to his business and /or buying his product ? I guess that's a goal here, as we drove a real good head builder away among others.

[waxhead]

forever4.....time to step up to the plate

[Mitch//pa]

Originally Posted by hardtimes

I'm with Franchise and P.S. in pondering why there are those that seem to want to crucify this engine builder,despite what's been stated here and other threads relative to this members business ..what is going on here
Mitch of Pa, have you purchased one of his engines or been to his shop and had bad experience ? He has told us that he has built A/B engines for fifty years and has tried to explain to those who do not know engine building...what his methods involve. He is a machinist with a machine shop dedicated to building A/B engines. He has built hundreds of such engines and that is exactly what WE need in this 'hobby' ! If you do not have direct knowledge and/or evidence to support disparaging him and his business, why are you doing it ? We need to drive another engine builder off of this forum and hurt his business...without ever having gone to his business and /or buying his product ? I guess that's a goal here, as we drove a real good head builder away among others.

Hardtime,
i was only making a joke in my post #18 and not downiing anyone or saying anything detremental about his work. you took my post out of context i guess sometimes that happens over the internet. i didnt get the impression that P.S. did also, but for anyone else that did not see it as a chuckle lets loosen up our depends a little or get a larger size. (thats another joke) geez

[George Miller]

Originally Posted by forever4

Well, here is how he machines the bottom of the block and resets the up-down position of the main caps, if that floats your boat. Not mine.

I do not care for doing it that way, does not work for me. But each to there own.

[oldwoodsman]

Originally Posted by hardtimes

I'm with Franchise and P.S. in pondering why there are those that seem to want to crucify this engine builder,despite what's been stated here and other threads relative to this members business ..what is going on here
Mitch of Pa, have you purchased one of his engines or been to his shop and had bad experience ? He has told us that he has built A/B engines for fifty years and has tried to explain to those who do not know engine building...what his methods involve. He is a machinist with a machine shop dedicated to building A/B engines. He has built hundreds of such engines and that is exactly what WE need in this 'hobby' ! If you do not have direct knowledge and/or evidence to support disparaging him and his business, why are you doing it ? We need to drive another engine builder off of this forum and hurt his business...without ever having gone to his business and /or buying his product ? I guess that's a goal here, as we drove a real good head builder away among others.

I agree. I would hope that now some of his customers would step up to the plate and help this builder out. His explanation of his practice makes sense to me, but I guess the proof is in the pudding.

[MikeK]

P.S., Why the direct attack on Forever4 ? Who said this is a scorable debate where someone has "lost the debate and now should concede"? Is there a rubric that I missed? Obviously you wish for a 'win' in defense of the rebuild you just purchased. Why? I'm sure it will run fine for you, but not everyone has to like or agree with an unorthodox approach to fixing a leak, nor list scorable points why. That doesn't make them wrong. It doesn't make them a loser because they do not like a modification done to a part.

Count me in your loser category because I also consider any modification of a part's datum plane a poor solution to a leak. For me, a tiny smear of sealer on assembly accomplishes the same thing without irreversible machining.

[hardtimes]

Hey Mitch,
No, I did not take it as a joke and did not realize that, as I guess that I was thinking of a mans livelihood and business taking a hit ...no matter at this time whether a hit was intended or not. Think on that ! A person can do a million good deeds and (business) be taken apart by thoughtless words. I will try to pay closer attention to posts (yours/others) for levity going forward. But, I did not ask you if you have had any direct knowledge of ..to impune. I asked because I was looking for info ..one way or another that there's evidence that Joe's work is substandard. Heck, I don't want a substandard product either. To show proof of this last statement:

Years ago, I made the looong trip to Turlock (having to camp overnight)) to check out the A/B builder there. I'd heard stories..good/bad. The bad was heard mostly from major competitor. I liked father/son shop idea and decided to support that. I had no knowledge of Joe being this shops main brain support. My Russian B is still running strong.

Anyway, I respect ALL members of this forum and would never and have never shown disrespect during agreements and/or disagreements. I try to be helpful and especially to new members. I just go on evidence pro/con for my conclusions. Did not mean to offend.

[machine girl]

We have a larry reed motor pitbull, that the build was done by joe, a few years ago( or more ?) he is top notch and knows his stuff. many on this forum are being very disrespectful to joe without a leg to stand on. time for ryan to end this .

[Marco Tahtaras]

Originally Posted by machine girl

We have a larry reed motor pitbull, that the build was done by joe, a few years ago( or more ?) he is top notch and knows his stuff. many on this forum are being very disrespectful to joe without a leg to stand on. time for ryan to end this .

What did I miss? I didn't find any disrespectful comments except TOWARD those that disagreed with Joe's methodology on one point of interest. Nobody inferred anything negative about the quality of his work.

I am another that would not choose that method and that's My choice. Should I be castigated for sharing that? I suspect Joe would work with me if asked and build a good engine to my preferences.

As I understand it the purpose of this forum is to share information which certainly should include preferences on any aspect or restoration. If we can't do that then there would be no point in participating.

[mike657894]

Is jnoe at turlock still doing model A engines? I wanted to give out his name as a well known rebuilder. does any one have his number. googleing turlock machine dint yield. to some one asking to get a warranted short block shipped to Europe. I have recommended Antique in skokie. others to recommend will be helpful also.

[Jim Brierley]

And the tabs on inserts are not there to prevent brg rotation, they merely locate the brg.

[Bob C]

I found this, don't know if it is current.
Turlock Machine
Phone 209-495-1689

[goodcar]

Originally Posted by MikeK

I remember a certain "Miracle engine" guy, (Flanagan?) that used to butcher, er, I mean 'improve' blocks like this. You get the best of all worlds:

1) The cam/crank gear spacing gets pinched too tight.
2) The pistons, already higher after decking, will now be alarmingly high.
3) About the oil grooves- those appear to be Rich's A.E.R. inserYour transmission will now work automatically. With the lost alignment of the crank center to the tranny, the thing will pop out of gear all by itself!

ts, not poured babbitt.

This is interesting. I have a rebuilt engine (babbit), the cam/crank spacing was tight and the transmission jumps out of 3rd when slowing down. In order to get the flywheel housing correct, had to have .001 shim on the left ear and .010 on the right but still jumps out of gear. Have also suspected the rebuilt transmission (by one of the big three) may be the problem. I'm not a machinist. Is there any way I can determine exactly how far out the crank alignment is. Even if the crank is misaligned. shouldn't have gotten the flywheel housing alignment correct fixed the jumping out of gear problem??

[mike657894]

Originally Posted by Bob C

I found this, don't know if it is current.
Turlock Machine
Phone 209-495-1689

That is current I talked to him. He is open for bussiness. And I got the info to the interested party.

[Chris Haynes]

Joe recently moved into his new shop. I am anxious to see it.